From: Martin Fick <mfick@codeaurora.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>, Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Ideas to speed up repacking
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:26:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201312031226.52033.mfick@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqhaapq0xc.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
> Martin Fick <mfick@codeaurora.org> writes:
> > * Setup 1:
> > Do a full repack. All loose and packed objects are
> > added
...
> > * Scenario 1:
> > Start with Setup 1. Nothing has changed on the repo
> > contents (no new object/packs, refs all the same), but
> > repacking config options have changed (for example
> > compression level has changed).
On Tuesday, December 03, 2013 10:50:07 am Junio C Hamano
wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
> > Reading Martin's mail again I wonder how we just
> > "grab all objects and skip history traversal". Who will
> > decide object order in the new pack if we don't
> > traverse history and collect path information.
>
> I vaguely recall raising a related topic for "quick
> repack, assuming everything in existing packfiles are
> reachable, that only removes loose cruft" several weeks
> ago. Once you decide that your quick repack do not care
> about ejecting objects from existing packs, like how I
> suspect Martin's outline will lead us to, we can repack
> the reachable loose ones on the recent surface of the
> history and then concatenate the contents of existing
> packs, excluding duplicates and possibly adjusting the
> delta base offsets for some entries, without traversing
> the bulk of the history.
>From this, it sounds like scenario 1 (a single pack being
repacked) might then be doable (just trying to establish a
really simple baseline)? Except that it would potentially
not result in the same ordering without traversing history?
Or, would the current pack ordering be preserved and thus be
correct?
-Martin
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code
Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-03 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-02 23:30 Ideas to speed up repacking Martin Fick
2013-12-03 0:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-03 3:27 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-12-03 7:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-03 10:17 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-12-03 17:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-03 19:26 ` Martin Fick [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201312031226.52033.mfick@codeaurora.org \
--to=mfick@codeaurora.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).